1. 1 Science Technology and Innovation in the chemicals sector: the role of SusChem Andrea Tilche European Commission DG Research Head of the Unit « Environmental Technologies and Pollution Prevention »

2. 2 Why does R&D matter? 3% Action Plan (2003); Each Member State has set its own target for increased R&D intensity; Green Paper on ERA (2007);

3. 3 The landscape is changing

4. 4 12.7 25.0 29.1 3.6 3.5 34.4 38.4 2.9 11.4 15.9 10.1 13.0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 % 19932005 World shares of expenditure on R&D

5. 5 Exports of High - tech products EU-27 (1) JP CN US KR 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 1999200020012002200320042005 %

6. 6 China leads computing exports EU-27 (1) JP CN US KR 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 1999200020012002200320042005 %

7. 7 EU R&D-intensity remains at structural lower level

8. 8 Stagnating R&D intensity in the EU

9. 9 Although some MS recorded impressive progress Progress not monopoly of catching-up countries (e.g.CZ) Also high R&D intensive countries were able to further increase their high R&D intensity

10. 10 R&D intensity: 4 groups of countries

11. 11 Distance-to-target for each individual Member State

12. 12 The gap is mainly in the private sector

13. 13 Is low R&D-intensity a result of lack of dynamism of EUs industrial structure ?

14. 14 85% gap is due to low business investment structural differences between EU-US – medium-tech industries dominate in the EU

15. 15 Sectoral composition of R&D in EU and US (2005)

16. 16 BERD (Business enterprise expenditure on R&D) and Value Added

17. 17 BERD as % of Value Added

18. 18 BERD of SMEs However, R&D intensity is 0.34% in the EU and 0.68% (the double) in the US

19. 19 Share of World top 1000 Companies (in terms of market capitalisation) created since 1980 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% EUUS Substantial differences in growth path of high-tech SMEs … 70% of these US large C ies created after 1980 are active in ICT sectors

20. 20 Public and private R&D are fully complementary

21. 21 Countries with high involvement of private sector in funding of R&D have also the highest levels of government- funded R&D

22. 22 Research Excellence: EU remains second behind the US, but scores relatively well in traditional disciplines

23. 23 Research excellence: the EU is worlds first producer of scientific knowledge

24. 24 Citation index

25. 25 However, … Other parts of the world are getting to be more specialised in chemistry

26. 26 Knowledge flows from Science to Technology weaker in the EU

27. 27 Technological innovations rely more on US science than on EU science This graph: Share of EU and US scientific publications cited in biotech patents Data in other technological fields show similar patterns

28. 28 From Science to high- tech, high-growth industries: the case of nanotechnology

29. 29 Public funding of nanotech R&D similar or higher than competitors

30. 30 Nanotech companies are bigger in the US Average size of Nanotech companies in leading countries (turnover in US$ million)

31. 31 How to reverse this trend? INNOVATION is the only European asset that can make the difference Open innovation schemes More investments in high-tech sectors Start-up programmes in Universities linked to chemical entrepreneurship programmes Promotion of Public-Private-Partnerships Better exploitation of funding opportunities along the innovation chain Focus on excellence – clusters and regions

32. 32 Technology platforms: a key instrument for a new competitiveness policy They build strategic partnerships between the public and private sector, the academia, the civil society Through this, they should reduce the risk in investing on research, creating a better environment for the increase of private investments They provide roadmaps for planning incremental innovation They act as fora for strategic thinking towards radical innovation And improve the diffusion of sustainable technologies also suggesting how to overcome regulatory barriers, to define new procurement rules, economic instruments, etc.

33. 33 How Technology Platforms may contribute to FP7 Technology Platforms are generating the political momentum for a stronger industrial participation in the Framework Programme Several TPs, among which the SusChem, are cited in the FP and in the SP text as one of the sources of the FP7 research agenda Major contributions are given in the phase of preparation of the work programmes

34. 34 The importance of SusChem It was able to mobilise stakeholders around key objectives It produced important and substantial documents, from the vision, to the strategic research agenda, to the implementation plan It should evolve through a more capillar organisation at national/regional level, in order to better involve SMEs and local actors It should extend its scope towards innovation leadership issues (possible recommendation from the HLG)

35. Thanks for your attention! andrea.tilche@ec.europa.eu